Michael Spinks or Billy Conn, who ranks higher pound-for-pound?

...Non-pollin' motherfather. :bart Wants everyone to "explain themselves", I guess. :twisted:

 

Definatley Conn

 

Spinks....better opponents, And when he beat the **** outa Holmes Spinks was given up 30 lbs..thats enough for me.

 

Ditto.:good

 

I like Spinks.. Only a single loss in career consisting of a very dominant lightheavyweight reign in a splendid era, followed by winning the heayweight crown from an ATG.. And while amateur careers don't usually factor into professional acheivments, having an olympic gold medal doesn't hurt him either.

 

Conn would have reamed that old overconfident fossil that turned up against Spinks first time out.

 

So would Harold Johnson, Charles and maybe Moore, Loughran etc for that matter too.

 

Conteh? :hey

 

Why don't we just cut to the chase and say that Tarver would have beaten a 1985 Holmes while we're at it?

 

The Hopkisn who beat Tarver would probably have won every round against that Holmes.

 

Nah, not Tarver.

 

I agree, and Spinks gave up 30 lbs to Holmes..Incredible

 

billy conn, and it's not even close.

 

@George Crowcroft and I talked about this a while back. I went with Conn and he went with Spinks.

His argument for Spinks (I think) was that he's greater at both LHW and HW, the 2 divisions they share. Which is true, as he did beat Holmes twice whereas despite Conn's efforts to beat Louis, his best win at HW is Bob Pastor (not his only one at the poundage tho, get that out of your head. Savold, McCoy, Dorazio etc. Man got some stuff done). Obviously Qawi, Lopez, Mustafa, Johnson, Davis and Sutherland are also an overall better group of Light Heavies than Lesnevich and Bettina (though Conn beating them both twice doesn't exactly hurt him).

My stance was that Conn has him beat in sheer overall depth, thanks to his run at Middleweight. While the group of Light Heavyweights Spinks fought is not exactly to be scoffed at, they're not really on the same level as Corbett III, Zivic, Yarosz, Apostoli, Krieger, Bettina, Zale and Lesnevich as overall fighters. Especially since he beat half the names just listed more than once. At worst these guys were world champions back when it mattered, at best they're pound for pound all time greats regardless of division. Can't really say that about any of the guys Spinks aside from Holmes.

And I do think some extra points should be given for the Louis performance as well. Obviously not as many as Spinks outright beating Holmes twice, but this is a blown up Middleweight/Light Heavyweight giving perhaps the most dangerous fighter ever serious fits. If people are willing to give Duran extra resume/legacy points for his effort vs Hagler, they ought to do the same with Conn vs Louis. I think that this bridges the gap and puts him over Spinks, close but clear for me.

 

Both guys are legit ATG fighters. Resume plays such a big part here and I like Conn's better